In general aviation (GA) and military aviation it is often not practical to provide restroom facilities on an aircraft due to weight, space, and cost concerns. Pilots and passengers in GA and military aircraft may be subjected to long flying legs or missions without the availability of restroom breaks. If a pilot or passenger has to urinate, it can be a distracting and dangerous condition, as it diverts attention away from flying the aircraft. Moreover, needs exist in other arts to provide devices for absorbing urine from children, incontinent adults, animals, hospital patients, and the like.
Adult diapers, catheters, and other urine collection devices are known in the art for absorbing or collecting urine from humans and animals. These various devices suffer from a number of drawbacks as is known in the art.
So-called adult diapers and the like are known for use with incontinent humans. Similar devices have been used with animals and the like. All are based upon infant diaper technology which uses absorption characteristics of various materials to wick away urine from the body. While the amount of research and development in this field has been considerable, and significant improvements have been made, these devices suffer from a number of drawbacks.
While babysitting his first grandchild in 1956, one Procter & Gamble (P&G) chemical engineer was determined to find a better way to diaper. He led a P&G group to research the possibilities of a disposable diaper that was absorbent, which prevented leaks while keeping babies dry (“Pampers Products”, 2000).
Although the first alternative to cloth diapers was imported from Sweden by Johnson & Johnson in the 1940s, that product was marketed mainly as a convenience for traveling families. It was Pampers, introduced in 1961 as a result from the P&G research, which removed the diaper container and laundry delivery truck in most American households by the end of the 1960s.
Ever since, P&G and its main competitor, Kimberly-Clark (maker of Huggies), along with other smaller diaper manufacturers have engaged in an active competition in diaper marketing and technology for a $3.5 billion annual market. The second revolutionary breakthrough in diapering came in the late 1970s.
Commercial production of superabsorbent polymers began in Japan in 1978, for use in feminine napkins. This early superabsorbent was a crosslinked starch-g-polyacrylate. Polyacrylic acids eventually replaced earlier superabsorbents, and is the primary polymer employed for superabsorbent polymers today. In 1980 European countries further developed the superabsorbent polymer for use in baby diapers.
The first diapers employing this technology used only a small amount of polymer, approximately 1–2 grams. In 1983, a thinner diaper using 4–5 grams of polymer and less fluff was marketed in Japan. The use of superabsorbent polymers revolutionized the diaper industry.
Diaper manufacturers began to design diapers to take advantage of the amazing liquid retention ability of the polymer. Superabsorbent polymers absorb, and retain under a slight mechanical pressure, about 30 times their weight in urine. The swollen gel holds the liquid in a solid, rubbery state and prevents the liquid from leaking onto the baby's skin and clothing.
Despite advances in absorption material technology, the wicking action of such absorbants is not always perfect. As a result, excreted urine may still remain in contact with the skin of the user, causing rash or other difficulties. While improved diaper materials tend to do a good job of keeping infants dry, these materials may not perform well with adults, particularly when sitting down, as the pressure from the body tends to force the absorbed urine to the surface. Thus, even with advanced superabsorbant materials and the like, diaper technology still has drawbacks which make it unacceptable for adult use, particularly in aviation.
Presently there is no single device acceptable for use by both male and female aviators for bladder relief. Existing aircraft relief tubes do not currently provide the desired compatibility and practicability for use either by female or male. Unisex type interfaces do not conform well in either case. The present urine collection life support equipment is not able to meet the demands of the aircrew and can potentially lead to compromised flight safety, through distractions from connections and disconnections.
Female options are either a commercially available adult diaper or an oval-shaped funnel, which requires them to partially undress before use. Males have the external condom catheter, which can cause skin irritation from residual urine exposure. The most commonly used male urine collection device is the “piddle-pack”, which requires the pilot to partially undress, loosen the lap-belt, extend the legs and often initiate a shallow dive to allow for use of the device.
Because of the problems associated with the present systems, many aircrews elect to self induce dehydration prior to a sortie to avoid the issue all together. Furthermore, there is no provision for use in aircraft where negative and positive “G” loading occurs. High-g maneuvers usually assure that the aircrew will have wet clothing from use and/or leakage from the storage container (“piddle-pack” for males and diaper for females). Long-term exposure to urine causes skin irritation and the possible development of shingles, which may render a pilot/aircrew member useless for days at a time.
Catheters and other invasive devices are also known in the art for collecting urine. Medical catheters require insertion into the urinary tract, a task which may be painful, and require a nurse, doctor or technician to perform. In addition to the risk of urinary tract infection, such catheters may be uncomfortable if used for an extended period of time.
Other types of urine collection devices have also been sold to motorist and general aviation users. These devices which may be sold under the trade name LITTLE JOHN™ (See: http://www.acespilotshop.com/pilot-supplies/safety/little-john.htm incorporated herein by reference) are little more than containers provided with screw or snap-on adapters for male and female body parts. These devices require the use of gravity in order to make them work, and also require partial undressing of the user, which may be impractical in a small aircraft. In addition, these devices may not seal properly, and require the user to manually remove the device from storage, use it, and return it carefully to storage. Such devices, being open in use, may create odor problems as well.
Another product marketed to General Aviation users and the general public is sold under the trade name RESTOP® 1 (See: http://www.acespilotshop.com/pilot-supplies/safety/rest-stop-1.htm incorporated herein by reference). Chen, U.S. Pat. No. 6,186,990, issued Feb. 13, 2001, and incorporated herein by reference, discloses a similar product. This solution provides a container filled with an absorbent gel. When a user urinates into the container, the urine is absorbed into the gel and allegedly rendered odorless, harmless, and easy to handle. Of course, this solution is 100% disposable, and like the LITTLE JOHN™ requires the user partially undress to use.
In the medical, aviation, and aerospace arts, various other urine collection devices are known. Some such devices are similar to a catheter except that in place of a tube which is inserted into the urinary tract, a rubber or elastic cup-like device with an attached collection tube is attached to the male penis. Examples of such devices may be found, for example, in Moyet-Ortiz, U.S. Pat. No. 5,267,989, issued Dec. 7, 1993 and Cross et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,267,990, issued Dec. 7, 1993, both of which are incorporated herein by reference. Such devices can also cause discomfort and irritation, and also may not be adaptable to female pilots. Like catheters, such devices cause unnecessary irritation when the user does not need to urinate.
Additionally, an important aspect of any relief system is the ability to relax to be able to use the device. This is very important as urination begins from a relaxation process not contraction process. A good relief system will have wide social acceptance whether it be for an astronaut, wheelchair victim, emergency vehicle driver, long distance cyclist, triathlete, glider pilot, recreational pilot, bed-ridden patient, incontinence, or someone with other bladder problems.
A new solution is needed to resolve the problems of leakage in adverse aircraft orientation and also address the issues of fit and comfort. The new system should not inhibit the use of ejection seats. The new solution should include a full-dress hands-free operation. The new solution should be easy to put on, comfortable to wear, and easy to remove. Leakage should be eliminated. It should also be compatible with current aircrew protective assemblies such as the Advanced Technology Anti-G Suit (ATAGS). The new solution should share commonality between the male and female systems. A single comfortable device is a necessity.
Thus, a need exists in the art for a system which may be comfortably worn by pilots and passengers of both genders (as well as hospital patients, the incontinent, and animals), which will collect and remove urine away from the body without irritating the skin or creating discomfort.